The Film Anatomy of Hate by Mike Ramsdell

Table of Contents

Introduction
Anatomy of Hate
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Hatred is generally a state of entrenched emotional dislike against people, ideas, objects, and institutions. The film Anatomy of Hate by Mike Ramsdell highlights the aspect of hatred being created due to mental fear fueled by a lack of communication and understanding (Ramsdell, 2009). The film portrays the nature of hate in society both in the past and at the present. According to the film, modern cultures still illustrate that there are still incidences associated with hatred resulting from prejudice and indoctrination. This article focuses on my position regarding the idea of communication and hate.

Anatomy of Hate

I believe that the persistent conflicts between Israeli and Palestine are due to hatred and breakdown of communication between their leaders. The two countries can live harmoniously only if the above causes are resolved. In the documentary, a character by the name of Mr. Ahmed asserts that religion has not done enough in reducing the level of hatred between the two nations (Ramsdell, 2009).

The main reason is that the two nations are affiliated to two different religions. I believe that religious leaders should be blamed for failing to inform the believers about the importance of the coexistence of the two communities. If the two warring parties could communicate constructively, they would have reached an agreement without any difficulties (Neve, 2012).

The film asserts that hatred should be blamed for being the major cause of human crimes in the United States killings (Ramsdell, 2009). For instance, the murder of James Byrd and Matthew Shephard are incidences of hatred. I believe that several crimes in the US are fueled by racial discrimination and related prejudices. I do acknowledge the fact that the above argument illustrated in the film is correct.

Therefore, if the society plans to eliminate this hatred, they must resort to communication. Through communication, societies can understand and appreciate one another. Equally, I believe that if humans become open to one another, fears and hatred will be replaced with appreciation and understanding.

In the last part of the film, viewers are introduced to a mixture of sensitive gravitas in a fatality, aggression, warfare, and commemorative public politics (Ramsdell, 2009). I blame the above issues on hatred and failure to communicate. Few courageous people who have managed to overcome their cultural temperaments such as Martin Luther King and other human rights activists were able to communicate their grievances to the authorities of their times. In my opinion, humans can show an understanding and compassion for one another if only they can learn to communicate effectively.

Conclusion

Ramsdells documentary on the Anatomy of hate shows that the factors that contribute to hatred are religious predispositions, racial preconceptions, and social prejudices (Ramsdell, 2009). Such incidences are depicted in the documentary through Israel-Palestinian conflicts, Westboro Church, and Aryan movement incidences (Watt, 2010). I believe that crimes and conflicts experienced in modern society are due to the factors that Ramsdell pointed out in his review of the Anatomy of hate film.

The existence of several examples of crimes related to hatred compels me to agree with Ramsdells film. Based on the film, I believe that hatred contributes to major misdeeds and misunderstandings in society. To reduce hatred, two warring parties should communicate constructively (Ramsdell, 2009).